MUSKEGON, MI – The three Republican-nominated candidates for Michigan Supreme Court say they believe in the “rule of law” as opposed to the “rule of judges,” which they claim their Democratic opponents support.

Justices Stephen J. Markman and Brian K. Zahra and Oakland County Circuit Judge Colleen O'Brien, making a circuit of towns across Michigan, stopped in Muskegon Tuesday. They met with members of the MLive and Muskegon Chronicle editorial board and a reporter.

Markman, Zahra and O’Brien were nominated Sept. 8 by the Michigan Republican Party at its state convention. But their names appear on the ballot without party affiliation, as do those of their Democrat-nominated opponents, Connie Kelley, Bridget McCormick and Shelia Johnson.

The “rule” phrases were Markman’s. He’s been a justice since Gov. John Engler appointed him in 1999. Gov. Rick Snyder appointed Zahra in 2011, while O’Brien is seeking a first term on the high court to succeed retiring Democratic justice Marilyn Kelly.

“The three of us view ourselves as being ‘rule of law’ justices,” Markman said, meaning they base their decisions strictly on the text of laws and the Michigan Constitution. “Our oppenents, we believe, are fairly characterized (as believing in) ‘rule of judges,’” Markman asserted, meaning judges’ personal beliefs about issues.

None of the candidates are fond of how politicized and costly supreme court election campaigns have become, but their opinions about how to address it differed.

“It is a difficult process,” O’Brien said of Michigan’s system – mandated by the state Constitution -- of having high-court candidates nominated by the political parties but showing up on the ballot as nonpartisan. “I definitely believe judgeship should be nonpartisan.”

But, she said of being nominated at a state convention, “It’s important to have the public involved.”

O’Brien was nominated after a contest with Michigan Court of Appeals Judge Jane Markey.

Zahra has a different view. He favors ending election of justices and moving to a system in which the governor appoints them for a set term of years – possibly 16, he suggested. Such a change would require an amendment to the Michigan Constitution.

All the candidates support at least some of a series of jury reforms the Supreme Court implemented statewide on Sept. 1, 2011. Markman wrote the reforms, a wider list of which were tried as a pilot program in several courts across Michigan before the final set were adopted statewide. One of the judges participating in the experiment was Muskegon County Circuit Judge Timothy G. Hicks.

Among other rule changes now in effect, jurors are allowed to ask questions of witnesses and to discuss civil cases among themselves before the end of a trial. The Supreme Court will review the changes in 2014.

O’Brien said she particularly likes letting jurors asks questions of witnesses, something she said she has allowed for years in her trial court. She also supports letting jurors discuss civil cases before the end of a trial, especially in a long trial lasting weeks.

Zahra also favors an innovation letting trial judges explain to jurors the laws governing a case at the start of a trial, rather than waiting until just before jury deliberations.

The interview was live-streamed on video and can be
replayed. The post with the video is on MLive's Muskegon news page, headlined
"Republican candidates for Michigan Supreme Court answering questions in
Muskegon."